assault

One of the things that bugged me about this general idea was the idea of overthrowing "dictatorships". The problem is, of course, that deciding which "dictatorships" to overthrow involves making unilateral political choices, and then enforcing them.

In particular, of course, who is to replace these "dictatorships"? This leads to many of the real-world difficulties that are to be seen in Iraq at the moment. In other words, it implies tacitly taking political stances on real world events - that is, using your game to editorialise.

This factor is best seen by the degree to which this thread is lurching towards Non-Gaming Discussion territory.

Personally, I tried to deal with it by operating "in character", but really it can't be adequately dealt with in that manner.

It is, for the record, entirely possible for superbeings to be politically and socially active without adopting the kind of right-wing libertarian approach that Wanderer has defended here. Implicitly, that was what I was trying to defend in my "in character" voice. The activist superbeing there becomes a defender and supporter of the "Common Man" (sic), instead of supplanting them with their own activity.

The idea would be that their actions would be directed towards supplementing the actions of "ordinary" humans, and, of course, acting to prevent other superhumans from abusing their powers. "Abusing their powers", of course, involves trying to forcibly impose their own visions of utopia on the world - that is, engaging in the traditional supervillain sport of world conquest.

An "activist" superhuman (or superteam) of a conservative ilk might decide to overthrow a certain government. One of another variety might well chose to defend it.

This could well be worth playing out, but it would be best to do so with actual players on both sides, and a GM of almost superhuman skill, subtlety and patience!

And to briefly return to the "overthrowing dictatorships" thing: what if there a civil war going on in a particular country? Who do you support? What criteria do you use to make that decision? What information do you use? Who do you believe? None of this is trivial, and it takes you into politically partisan territory very quickly.

This could be a fine game, but, well...

Finally, not all "four-colour" sentiments are less "realistic" than one-eyed ideologues would have us believe. A lot of "realistic" game content appears to be game-world reflections of real-world political prejudices.

On the other hand, I'd really like to play in a campaign based on "Captain America, Commie Smasher". I think that you could turn it into a really fun "Doctor Strangelove"-type satire of "realistic" superheroic campaigns.

Originally posted by Wanderer

"Courage and vision to change the world always look like a folly and a crime to the coward and the dimwitted. Everyone has the possibility, and the responsibility, to change the world for the better. I just have a greater leverage, and a greater duty".

"Let's be clear about this. You tipped your hand when you dismissed ordinary people as 'bleating* masses'. In your view, normal humans are animals, and you are a higher form of life.

You are talking like a typical aristocrat. The common people are scum, and need a white knight to come along and rescue them.

But they aren't scum, and they will rescue themselves, and it's the likes of you that they will rescue themselves from.

For me, I will take my stance with them, and encourage and lend a hand to their efforts to liberate themselves. I will not side with your attempt to substitute your ego for their freedom, and I will fight you tooth and nail if you persist.

And as for your pretensions of being somehow better than humanity, just remember this - monsters can have abilities beyond those of humans, too."

*OOC: "bleathing" was a typo, wasn't it?

Originally posted by Wanderer

bleathing masses ... If destiny has given me these godlike powers, it's my responsibility to use them as I deem best, to make the world a better place, and I won't skirt my duty. If you don't want to be part of the solution, stand aside, or be part of the problem"

"Destiny seems to have given you more than just 'godlike powers'. It seems to have handed you a case of drooling megalomania as well."

Frankly if I was playing in this kind of setting, my PC would turn against the others.

His argument would go: "ordinary humans have to resolve their own problems. They don't need some bunch of wannabe demigods to do it for them."

The situation would get violent as soon as they started overthrowing "dictatorships".

The characters you are describing are supervillains, pure and simple.

Hopefully some superheroes will come along and stomp them.

Originally posted by GestaltBennie

One of the ideas I'm toying with is using the book to generate solo scenarios.

This would be very cool, if you could get it to work.

The Hero system is very good for solo gamers - character design and "building stuff" is intricate and fun. Adding some ability to actually play would make it better.

I still will want some stuff on running mysteries later on, even if it isn't in this book.

A mystery scenario or two would be good.

Something like a whodunnit with allowances made for superpowers. This could either be an exercise in clue following, or the characters might have to do a bit of leaning on informants - including "trashing the bar" - in order to find out what is going on.

Alternatively, the characters might have to work out some Riddler/Joker type clues or follow the villain's insane thought patterns in order to find out where the baddie is going to strike next.

A bit of Batman stuff, in other words. Other characters do this too, of course.

It could be argued that this is more properly in the territory of Dark Champions, but the kinds of storylines I have in mind aren't really the kind that require the characters to be carrying absurd quantities of rocket launchers and automatic weapons.

Well, I'm a serial Brick player, for starters... In the end, I think I want to play Superman. (shrug).

A lot of my characters tend to have fairly similar personalities. They tend to be me, with only some rather minor changes. Assault was one of the more extreme cases, since he was a lot more assertive (aka loud and obnoxious) than me. Then again, he's become part of the template for my standard character. He was also difficult to play after a while, so I had to gradually tone him down.

I have a particular fondness for buying Life Support for my characters. If I can justify it at all, I will stick it in. In some cases, I will even resort to saying: "this IS the character's superpower. Otherwise, he's a normal."

I rarely play female characters, too. I just don't think that I play them well, or maybe I have just seen too many other males play female characters rather badly.

My non-superheroic characters are a bit different, but they also tend to cluster around certain characteristic patterns. At least the patterns vary a bit between genres.

I'm not too bothered by people playing the characters they like playing. It can, occasionally, be a problem, if the characters are inappropriate to a particular game, but generally I don't have much of a problem with it.

I suspect that a lot of players really like playing "themselves" in a (super-)heroic setting. In some cases, unfortunately, you could add a "with" to that sentence.

Originally posted by Rechan

I can't tell if you're upset with my suggestion or if you approve of it?

 

Considering there are a lot of "stereotypical" characters on this thread. And given I've done my homework (to the point of nearly running a Steampunk game), I would think these are just as British as Arthurian suggestions.

Well, I dislike the Arthurian suggestions too...

I'm just amused that "Victorian gentlemen" are still something that people associate with present day Britain.

It's kind of like all US supers being cowboy-themed. OK, some probably are, but all of them?

Originally posted by Rechan

Naturally, you can always have a Robin Hood; a gadgeteer/weaponsmaster with lots of nifty arrows.

 

Here's an idea: Merry men! A duplicating martial artist.

 

The Hand: Dressed as the perfect Victorian Aristocrat with manners to boot, The Hand is a force manipulator (Think Green Lantern).

 

Steamstress: A gadgeteer who creates robots/powered armor/etc that runs on steam power, or looks like Steampunk stuff.

Mindboggling.

And people wonder why other people get bothered by stereotypes...

"the perfect Victorian Aristocrat"... "A gadgeteer... that runs on steam power"... Just perfect.

Originally posted by Greatwyrm

Maybe one or both of Rome's founders were the first werewolves? Maybe they're immortal, hiding out in Europe somewhere, and want the artifact back?

I wouldn't go with the _first_ werewolves. That closes off too many other traditions about skinchangers. But certainly make them werewolves - it's a good thought.

Except Remus was killed by Romulus. Presumably only Romulus would still be around. Than again, Remus might be around in a somewhat different form.

Actually, whether you use the tie in or not, Monsieur Remus would be a good name for the necromancer.

And a digression on French supermodels: they're called skeletons. If they'd eaten more when they were alive, they'd be zombies.

Just a final thought...

Originally posted by egyptian

If you had the power to influence minds how long would it be before you "convinced" one of the cheerleaders to go out with you?

Stuff like this can get very dark very fast.

If a PC started pulling this kind of stuff, I would have a Professor X type NPC slap them down right at the start.

Running with an NPC is different. I think the approach to take would be for the NPC to abuse their powers in minor ways at first, gradually escalating as they learn that they can get away with stuff. Preferably, they get stopped before things go as far as rape or murder.

And this, of course, is where the "with great power..." moral lecture comes in. It raises the whole business of the relationship of those with superpowers to those without, and all that kind of thing.

So, yes, I think this kind of issue does need to be looked at - provided it is done tastefully.

Rebel without a clue

One of the students starts to regularly head into town to engage in a bit of life in the fast lane: sex, drugs, & rock 'n' roll. Not to mention fast cars and/or motorbikes. His heightened reflexes make him a natural, and his invulnerability allows him to take risks no normal would take...

How long will it be before he blows his secret identity, or otherwise gets into real trouble?

If that's not enough, he is looking for something to believe in. Cults are rather overused here, so maybe he's joined a political fringe group...

While the group aren't terrorists (too obvious!), they believe in some really intense stuff. What happens when the young super ends up on national TV, denouncing US involvement in Guamanga?

And once he goes out into the political fringes, how long will it be before militant mutant/metahuman rights activists recognise him as one of their own? And what about anti-metahuman types? Even if that kind of thing isn't a big deal in your setting, political radicals who are exposed as metahumans will tend to draw a lot of attention from all directions, whether hostile or "friendly".

Definitely make the group he joins non-villainous. It's too pat if they just turn out to be nasty. Well, unless you are really going Comics Code, where anyone out of the mainstream is an Evil Communist.

Make the tension one where there is a tension between his newfound (controversial) beliefs and his identity as a student of the school and member of the group. Which is more important? Don't provide pat answers...

Thoughts:

1. Beware of the stereotype that all supers outside the US have names related to their national origins. Feel free to use the same kind of names you would use for US characters with the same powers.

2. Failing that, rip characters from comics produced in the country in question. See the following pages for all the characters you can eat:

http://www.internationalhero.co.uk/

3. Like all developed countries these days, the UK has a swag of immigrants from pretty nearly any country you care to mention. So if you want to use characters from Australia, Canada, India, Panama, Botswana, Albania or the Ukraine - feel free. But this applies to the US too, doesn't it?

4. My favourite British superhero is Zenith, but I don't think I would use him in most games.

I might consider playing "a homage to" him if I ever was strapped down and forced to play in an "Iron Age" game.

Re: Yeah, baby! (British supers)

Originally posted by Richard Logue

Also, should MI-21 allow Australian, (British) Canadian, Indian, etc. heroes into their august body?

No.

More to the point, Australian, Canadian, Indian, etc. heroes would face difficulties with their own governments if they tried to join.

Of course, if they were to take out British citizenship, things would be different.

Originally posted by Kristopher

Isn't it printed that IHA gets the Minuteman tech from ARGENT?

The exact quote is "... and with some help from ARGENT begun development of powerful Minuteman combat robots...".

So he's not exactly buying them off the shelf. On the other hand the "begun development" does tend to close off the option of some other outfit also having them.

Still, it's just a sentence. I change more important things than this every day of the week.

Originally posted by Killer Shrike

I have the IHA doing most of their messed up stuff in distant remote 3rd world localities far from the eyes of the world media, presenting a benevolent face to the world otherwise.

That's a good idea.

I once ran a scenario where a couple of mutants had manifested in an African (kind of Somali) village and had been drafted into the local warlord militia outfit. The heroes were sent to "encourage" them to join their world's equivalent of the X-Men. It didn't quite work out that way.

Having Genocide working offstage could help in rationalising the disproportionate presence of superbeings in developed countries.

And it would provide lots of neat political slogans for pro-mutant activists.

Originally posted by Mike W

Living in Michigan, especially with my dad an autoworker(retired) the National Workers Party comes to mind first.

Oh, well, that's nothing.

Lots of Communist and Socialist parties have used names like that. "Labor"/"Labour" is another keyword. There's nothing hidden in names like that.

Except... when you see the term "National" in a name it often means "Nationalist", which is a keyword of an entirely different sort. I did a quick Google search which turned up a neo-Nazi outfit called the "Nationalist Workers Party".

Anyway, to get back to the topic: different types of organisations use different buzzwords. That's how they identify themselves and each other.

Clearly "Human Advancement" is a buzzword for "anti-mutant" in the CU.

We could define some others and use them instead or as well. This would allow splinters and rival sects to the IHA itself.

Maybe Genocide is a rival anti-mutant group. That would allow you to use both.

About the only problem with that would be that both have Minutemen robots! But that can be worked around. It's highly likely that they got the design from the same source. And if they have both continued to develop them their designs may have diverged...

Originally posted by Mike W

I'm of two minds on the name idea. I mean we do have socialist and communist parties in this country. They just don't call themselves such, especially the socialists because both "socialist" and "communist" are thought of as dirty words in mainstream America.

May I ask: who are the socialist and communist parties that don't call themselves such?

I could give you a list of socialist and communist groups in the US that do in fact use those words in the names.

---

On the main point of the thread: I agree that (Project) Genocide is probably a better name for the armed wing of an anti-mutant movement than for the movement as a whole. I'm willing to go with the IHA for that.

I'm a little disappointed by the new leadership introduced in 5E. I would rather go with the old lot, perhaps hidden behind a layer of front-people. Unfortunately rewriting the current lot as front-people would take some serious effort - more than I could be bothered with for something that doesn't matter much anyway.

Originally posted by Metaphysician

You are presuming that the PCs *should* be able to last more than a single hit from the JLA/Avengers, and that they *should* be able to do anything to villains that can challenge the JLA/Avengers-level teams. Neither of these are valid assumptions.And thus, they generally *aren't.*

Of course many PCs should be able to "last more than a single hit" from Black Canary, the Atom, Green Arrow, Elongated Man, Hawkman, Aquaman, or, indeed, Batman. Flash too, come to think of it, but Flash never just hits you once.

As for villains: not all the JLA's villains are physically all that tough. Some are, of course. The ones that are _really_ tough are the interesting ones. The JLA seldom beats their top-end foes by dog-piling them. They usually end up keeping them busy until someone, usually one of the team's official thinkers, works out the proper way to beat them.

In other words, _most_ of the JLA's opponents are either not that physically formidable, or are so tough that even the JL has to outthink them. The cases where the JL's actual power level makes that much of a difference are comparatively rare. They happen, of course.

Marvel has historically been a little more fond of the "senses-shattering slugfest" than DC. As a result it is possible that the Avengers probably get into more comparatively evenly balanced combats than the JLA.

In any case, both groups are still scattered all over the map in terms of their power levels. _Anybody_ can be useful in their cases and conflicts. It _isn't_ necessary to be as powerful as Thor or Superman to be a member of the Avengers or JLA - and most of their members aren't.

Hmph. I'm just thinking about some of the clowns the Avengers have fought over the years. If beginning characters couldn't take them on, they shouldn't have begun!

Besides, I've read the first issue of the Avengers. Thor, Hulk, Iron Man, Ant-Man and the Wasp. Woo hoo. The Hulk disappeared next issue, and then it's Thor and his three little buddies, because this was very early Iron Man.

It's no wonder this team almost broke up a couple of issues later. If it wasn't for some guy they'd thawed out of an iceberg they would have.

Originally posted by Metaphysician

A beginning character *shouldn't* be able to compete in the slightest with the JLA/Avengers analogues of their world. Thats kind of the whole point of such a team: the most powerful and/or experienced heroes in the world.

This simply isn't true.

First, it has nothing whatsoever to do with characters based on an animated series, where the stars are pretty close to being the _only_ supers in the world!

Secondly, the power levels represented in groups like the JLA and Avengers are wildly variable. It is _entirely_ possible for beginning characters to be more powerful than many of the members of these teams.

It is also possible for them to be more experienced than many members of these teams too, BTW. There is nothing to stop a beginning character from having had a twenty year long solo career before they start play. Of course, that will be offset against their power level, but that's a deal I'm quite willing to make in many cases.

And incidentally, neither the Avengers nor the JLA are the most experienced heroes in their respective worlds. Perhaps you've heard of the Fantastic Four and the Justice Society of America?

A final thought on experience and established teams: it's not at all uncommon for such teams to accept inexperienced members. And their power levels aren't necessarily all that high either.

Originally posted by Kristopher

Kim Possible.

Yes. I actually watched it this morning (Saturday) and thought the same.

OK, there's not a lot of stuff to watch while loafing on a Saturday morning, but this is still quite legit source material. A couple of hours before it I watch the Australian made TV series Cybergirl, whose hero and her sidekicks are teens as well.

My only worry about Kim Possible is what _is_ that pink thing that lives in her sidekick's pocket? I keep thinking of an episode of Red Dwarf where Kryten built himself a detachable, independently mobile penis.

In defence of Veitch:

(1) His stuff on Swamp Thing was "just fine".

(2) Bratpack was a response to the incredibly tacky way DC handled the killing off of Jason Todd. "If you think Jason Todd should die, dial... If you think he should live, dial..." I mean, ewww...

(3) Bratpack was definitely memorable. On the other hand, Maximortal, part of the same project, was just unpleasant.

But anyway, back on topic!!!

I've been dabbling with 200 point characters over the last few days, in order to see what was possible.

My conclusions are: yes, you can build "high-powered" characters on that point total. The trick is to cut back their characteristics and skills to the _absolute_ minimum.

OK, everybody, break out your copies of the Champions genre book. Turn to the random chargen section.

Look at how the 350 point characters it produces break down: 125 points of Chars, 50 points of Skills, 100 points of primary powers, and 75 points of secondary powers.

OK, so if you are building a character on 200 points, you have a few options:

(1) Maintain most of the Chars and Skills, and cut down the powers to a minimum;

(2) Maintain most of the powers and cut down the chars and skills to the _absolute_ minimum,

(3) Balance the two, with your character being weaker in both areas, but still relatively balanced between the two.

Of course, if your character depends on a focus, or some similar limitation, your job becomes a lot easier, but I am generally assuming unmodified "mutant-style" powers here. (Or, of course, fairly weak powers mostly bought through focuses - "gadgets".)

Building Robin, Speedy, Bucky, or any of the non-powered sidekicks, in this situation, is a matter of emphasising chars and skills at the expense of powers. This works well enough.

Building relatively weak characters like Aqualad, early Wonder Girl, or even Smallville-style Clark Kent is a balancing act. This works too.

Building a power-monster like Kid Flash, or Rogue(!) involves sacrificing chars and skills in order to build up their powers. In effect, such characters are likely to have 150-175 points of powers, and only 25-50 points of chars and skills! This isn't actually a problem. They will suck a lot when things like END is involved, and they will have almost nothing going for them in terms of chars, apart, perhaps, from DEX and SPD, which are the characteristics essential to allowing them to be able to effectively use their powers.

They will, in short, be perfect for the "incredibly powerful younger sibling" role in the team. And if the whole team is like this, then you just explain that this is a team of 13 year olds...

Yes, you can do a whole lot of things with 200 point characters, if you think about it.

On the other hand, the "all powers" strategy doesn't work too well if you get too excited about things like maximum DCs, or characters only having a couple of powers, or all powers being limited. You can, of course, encourage modifications in this direction. For example, you could encourage power heavy characters to buy off a bunch of their less necessary multipower slots in favour of more skills and chars. Given their extreme weakness in this area, this might not be too difficult an ask.

Balancing all this, in other words, might be difficult. On the other hand, the more extreme characters are going to be highly limited in many situations - either in combat, for the skill mongers, or out of it, for the "full-power" characters.

And if the latter are a real problem, ban them from buying Reduced Endurance, and see how long the last throwing around 14 dice attacks at 7 END a piece, when they've only spent 40 points on their characteristics, mostly on DEX and SPD!

A final hint: you can get a lot of points back from buying your less "important" primary characteristics down from 10 to 8, or even less. And your GM can't really complain about your 13 year old not being as strong, strong-willed, or physically impressive as an adult, can they?

You can even use acne as a pretext for buying down your COM!

Originally posted by archer

In short, gamers never overlook anything.

Yeah, that's been my experience too.

Gamers never do anything stupid. They never miss obvious clues or hints. They never get so caught up in the wonderfulness of their Honkin' Big Guns that they forget to use their brains.

They never do any of that, do they?

...

The real problem in the horror genre is finding excuses to _not_ kill off your PCs.

Originally posted by cubist

All in all, I really miss that game...

Yes, it sounded like it had pretty much everything a game needs.